The Global Warming Policy Foundation has produced yet another devastating report: this time on the economics of wind farms. Turns out they're even worse than we thought.

Not only do the Bat Chomping Eco-Crucifixes (TM) ruin views, kill birds, cause bats to implode, destroy the British film industry, frighten horses, enrich rent-seeking toffs like David Cameron's father-in-law Sir Reginald Sheffield Bt, drive up electricity bills, kill jobs, create fuel poverty, cause old people to die of hypothermia, wipe out property values, drive people mad with strobing and noise pollution and enable smug liberal idiots to spout rubbish like "Oh, I don't mind them. Actually I think they're rather beautiful", but also by 2020 they're set to drive up consumer bills in the UK alone by £120 billion.

This is about ten times more than it would cost if we stuck to gas. (Which we have in abundance, just waiting to be exploited, in places like the Bowland Shale).

In the latest Spectator, Matt Ridley delivers the coup-de-grace. Here's a taste:

To the nearest whole number, the percentage of the world's energy that comes from wind turbines today is: zero. Despite the regressive subsidy (pushing pensioners into fuel poverty while improving the wine cellars of grand estates), despite tearing rural communities apart, killing jobs, despoiling views, erecting pylons, felling forests, killing bats and eagles, causing industrial accidents, clogging motorways, polluting lakes in Inner Mongolia with the toxic and radioactive tailings from refining neodymium, a ton of which is in the average turbine  despite all this, the total energy generated each day by wind has yet to reach half a per cent worldwide.

One thing is certain: the arguments against wind farms are so abundant and well-known that ignorance is no longer a plausible excuse. If you're involved in the wind farm industry, you're a weapons-grade tosser, simple as that.

Liberals (er, now “progressives”) love to scold the rest of us about “sustainability”, yet not a single one of their economic plans is sustainable. The main reason, is that they can’t spin a project’s financial statement longer than than they can spin propaganda supporting the project.

We used to have the prosperity and wealth to afford to entertain liberals by giving in to their demands, but no more. The left and big government conservatives have consumed all the jelly beans in the jar. We are not only out of money, but we are close to busting our credit limit as well.

After we work through the challenge the economic truth about alternative energy’s real impact on our prosperity, the next challenge will be to pay for the decommissioning costs. The instant that enviros see how much blame they are going to have to absorb from the rest of the voters for how much wealth they caused us to waste and how much environmental degradation they cause , wind power will start to be seen as the massive bird-killing eyesores they really are. Just like ugly strip mines that industry used to see as signs of industrial progress, that is until little kids started pointing and gawking at them as being the ugly wounds in the earth they really are, enviros will come to a day when they will not be able to get government to subsidize decommissioning these Bird Cuisinarts fast enough. They will even picket and protest that we must restore our “once-pristine vistas”. But of course, the blame for this economic debacle will be cast elsewhere, actually anywhere except right where it belongs: in the laps of utopian progressives.

I for one, would love if wind energy, solar energy, or hydro energy (small scale) were efficient. I dream of the day when each individual can produce their own energy needs themselves. This would result in those government run monopolies to go the way of dinosaurs. But, at this point, through extensive research I cannot find any alternative energy system that can reasonably produce energy for my home or business that will result in a half way decent return on investment. That is why the government offers grants and other incentives to get the return up to about 5% in good cases. However, personally I feel it is unethical to expect you all to pay for my energy consumption so will not go that route.

The fact that no matter what system one goes with that the rate of return with government subsidies is about the same tells me that the industry is so over regulated that there is little competitive juices running through it. I would love to collaborate with a proven tech to finance the development of a wind turbine system that actually can be produced and sold for a price to offer a 5% or greater return without the dang government using our tax dollars to enhance their control over our lives. Think of the impact individual household energy independence would have on our socialist government!!! What a great dream!!!

20
posted on 03/09/2012 11:51:40 PM PST
by Wpin
("I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny...")

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.